Introduction
Polycarp’s epistle to the Philippians was authored by—you guessed it—Polycarp. Polycarp was the Bishop of the church in Smyrna, and he wrote this letter to the church (or possibly churches) in Philippi, sometime before the middle of the second century AD. Most scholars date it to between 110 to 140 AD, although there is question about the epistle’s compositional origin. Some have proposed, not without validity, that what we today call “The Epistle of Polycarp” is actually a composite of two genuine works of Polycarp that, as the church attempted to preserve his writings, merged together to form the one complete body of what is read today. This, it must be noted, does not call into question whether the material was truly written by Polycarp, but merely wonders at the specific circumstances of the epistle’s composition.
What is undisputed is that Polycarp wrote this letter—or at least a portion of this letter—in light of his looming martyrdom at the hands of Rome. Polycarp, like so many of the Christian bishops in his day, including Ignatius, his contemporary (to whom Polycarp makes many references, and who, we know, was in direct communication with Polycarp; see “The Epistle of Ignatius to Polycarp”), was faced with the reality of Roman persecution and was ultimately executed for refusing to recant his faith in the Lord Jesus. The earliest account of Polycarp’s death can be read in the short work, aptly titled “The Martyrdom of Polycarp,” which was written by eyewitnesses of the event.
Why Read Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians
I found it worthy to read Polycarp’s epistle for a number of reasons. First, I find it generally interesting what the early church believed, practiced, and wrote, and given the short length of this epistle, it seemed like a worthwhile endeavor. Second, I believe that a careful study of church history is absolutely necessary for anyone who wishes to engage with “The Faith” in the way that I aspire to, and Polycarp’s epistle (although it is not nearly as early as, say, “1st Clement”) provides a uniquely insightful look into the theology, language, and concerns of the early church. I think all Christians will find Polycarp’s epistle to be instructional, and ought to be encouraged that the faith of Polycarp is so practical, relevant, and similar to us to today.
Polycarp on Scripture
There is a popular myth in the secular world, as well as, bafflingly, the evangelical church, that the early church did not have a Bible, nor did they know what should be included in the Bible. According to some—who are, in no unclear terms, either ignorant of the truth or deceitful—the earliest Christians were left to fend for themselves with no earthly idea what the Scriptures said. Apparently, it wasn’t until 325 AD that Christians finally got their act together and said, “We will read this book.” Even more preposterous, some have claimed that at the Council of Nicea—a council which had nothing to do with the biblical canon—Christians decided which books to include or exclude from the Bible… as if the text of Scripture derives its authority from men and not God. The whole thing is really the extension of a collective movement to paint Christianity as one among many religious mythologies, wherein the powerful leaders get to pick and choose what stays or goes. Such a reconstruction of history is exactly that—a reconstruction—and does not stand under the slightest historical scrutiny. Ironically, in the attempt to make Christianity into nothing more than a mere mythology, the ‘scholar’ must resort to mythologizing history.
Luckily, any honest reading of church history should put that myth to rest. The earliest writings of the church are teeming with references and direct quotations of Scripture, and Polycarp’s epistle to the Philippians is no different. Although Polycarp does not show as vast of a knowledge of Scripture as Clement does (which cannot be held against him, seeing how his letter is only a fifth the length of “1st Clement”), he still demonstrates a strong grasp of the New Testament.
First, Polycarp exalts the works of the Apostle Paul. He states that neither he, nor is anyone, is able “to fully grasp the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul,” and says that all who follow the teachings of Paul have “fulfilled the commandment of righteousness” (v. 3). As is to be expected given his audience, Polycarp makes reference to the book of Philippians, and calls on the Philippians to remember how Paul taught among them personally, though it is unclear from the language whether Polycarp intends to imply that his audience had personally met the Apostle Paul, or if he is making a more general statement. The former would heavily imply an early date of this epistle’s authorship, considering that the death of Paul likely occurred in the mid-60s AD (v. 3). He also echoes teachings of Paul found in 1st Corinthians, 2nd Corinthians, Ephesians, 1st Timothy, and 2nd Timothy.
Additionally, Polycarp draws from 1st John (v. 7), and quotes from 1st Peter on two different occasions (v. 1 and v. 8). He also directly quotes the Lord Himself on two occasions, first in v. 2, where he quotes Matthew chapter 7, and then in v. 7, where he quotes Matthew 26:41. It is obvious to anyone who reads this epistle that Polycarp intends to appeal to these works (which he calls “the sacred writings” in v. 12) as the accessible and agreed upon authority in the Christian Church. He does not argue for their authority, but—like Clement also does—argues from their authority and uses them as the ultimate source of his teaching. Such a belief about the nature and position of Scripture is, lest we blindly follow the empty opinions of today’s ‘scholars,’ to be expected; the Apostles themselves believed their writings to be authoritative and on par with the previously revealed Old Testament Scripture [Galatians 1:8 - 9; 1st Thessalonians 2:13; 2nd Peter 3:15 - 16]. The earliest faith and practice of the Christian Church was to rely on the written word of God as the primary and ultimate authority.
Various Notes and Observations
Because of the length of Polycarp’s epistle, many of its most intriguing statements are made in passing, and do not receive in-depth focus. However, I think that the following statements must be noted because of their relevance and subject matter:
“All [you] who are under heaven and believe in our Lord and God Jesus Christ, and in His Father” (v. 12). This statement stands out as a profoundly Christological and vibrantly Trinitarian declaration, and echoes the exclamation of Thomas in John 20:28. The most obvious point to be made is that Polycarp addresses Jesus as “God” in the proper sense, which of course is the rightful designation [John 1:1; Romans 9:5; Titus 2:13; 2nd Peter 1:1]. What must also be noted, however, is that Polycarp does not equate Jesus with the Father, but rather, says that Christians believe in both Jesus and the Father [see John 17:3]. That is to say, Polycarp repudiates the doctrines of Modalism or Oneness theology, which teach that God is unipersonal, and that the terms “Father,” “Son,” and “Holy Spirit” refer to distinct modes of God’s existence, but not to distinct persons (nuances abound, of course, for what heresies lack in truth they make up for in confusion—but that is the bare definition); Polycarp clearly addresses the Father as God throughout his epistle, and yet also addresses Jesus as God, and sees no contradiction in referring to them as distinct persons—Polycarp is a Trinitarian.
“Many desire to enter into this joy [of eternal life], knowing that it is by grace you are saved, not by works, but by the will of God through Jesus Christ” (v. 1). This statement, echoing Ephesians 2:8, should bring a smile to every Protestant’s face. We are saved, as Paul and Polycarp so directly state, by grace and not by works. It is in this that we are able to find peace with God: that Jesus has accomplished all that was required, and we simply, by being united to Him in faith, share in the blessings that He has merited on our behalf [Romans 5:1]. Now, Polycarp does not divorce saving faith and good works. He says clearly that “we must do [God’s] will, walk in His commandments, and love what He loves,” but this way of life is seen as the result of receiving eternal life, not a cause, means, or instrument of receiving eternal life (v. 2).
“Neither fornicators, effeminate individuals, nor those who defile themselves with men shall inherit the kingdom of God” (v. 5). It may seem unnecessary to highlight this phrase, which is nearly a direct quotation of 1st Corinthians 6:9, however, it is not so. I am still troubled to remember the countless ‘churches’ that abandoned the clear teaching of Scripture on matters of sexual ethics. The Bible could not be more direct: adultery, fornication, and homosexuality are not permissable. And yet, this did not stop an amazing mass of ‘Christians’ from celebrating such sins, particularly homosexuality (and the related farce of transgenderism). It is encouraging—and convicting—then, to see such an early Christians source standing firm upon what God has revealed, as Polycarp does. Polycarp here denounces three things: 1) sex outside the bounds of marriage; 2) Men engaging in a lifestyle of heightened femininity; 3) Men having sex with one another. To translate: hookup culture, transgenderism, and homosexuality are upheld as violations of God’s Law—no matter how the culture feels about them.
Λοιπόν - FINALLY
I found Polycarp’s epistle to the Philippians to be deeply insightful and edifying. His use of Scripture, Trinitarian language, and articulation of The Gospel are encouraging, as they align so clearly with how Christian’s throughout the ages have also expressed their faith. In his life, Polycarp stands as a shining example of faithfulness and hope. And, as it appears to me, Polycarp would be just at home in a Reformed church.
.JPG)
.jpg)
